We have a family friend who is a Chief Attendant on flights for a large airline beginning with A*, and she says less training than you would expect. Honestly though she didn't go into details when I asked sometime after 9/11. She said several co-workers of hers are fairly proficient at self-defense. And that doesn't mean they don't discuss scenarios and how they could react. Usually its with the care for the condition of the craft and passengers, which may be a little conservative for some of the rest of us, but the reality is that until you know or have reason to think otherwise a hijacking may not end with everyone dead. I think its highly situational how they would react to an in-air hijacking. In the exact scenario outlined last night, including a locked cockpit takeover, probably you would attempt to subdue the hijackers and enter the cockpit, because that scenario admits the distinct possibility that you are not really a hostage but are so much hamburger sitting on a large jet fuel projectile. Anyway, this show will give us something more to talk about at the next bbq.

If anything I wonder if in reacting to such a scenario, would you apply additional lethal force to the hijackers? Frankly I wouldn't stop at subduing them, not if it meant a possibility of them escaping and getting up and renewing their attack on the plane at some critical juncture. Good point to focus on disabling blows to the larynx or airway. I can think of several surfaces on a jetliner that should crush their skulls and render them unconsious, maybe worse. Brutal, but more effective. Maybe too much for the season opener, or for cable.

I think also marshalling enough force among passengers to take on the hijackers and overcome them could be tough - not everyone watches Spike / cable.